COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters
AD/HU 369/32 Seat Belt Assemblies - Inspection
and Replacement
11/78
Applicability: All 500D model 369D helicopters fitted with seat belt assemblies P/Nos. 369H6541-5 and -21.
Document: Hughes SIN No. DN-26.
Compliance: 1. Inspect within 25 hours time in service after 2 October 1978.
2. Replace within 100 hours time in service after 2 October 1978.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, introduced an Airworthiness Directive (AD) for McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters concerning seat belt assemblies. This legislation was enacted to address safety concerns related to seat belt assemblies in certain helicopter models, ensuring compliance with stringent safety standards. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority issued AD/HU 369/32 to mandate inspections and replacements of seat belt assemblies in 500D model 369D helicopters fitted with specific part numbers. The objective is to enhance flight safety by ensuring that seat belt assemblies are regularly inspected and replaced as required, thereby mitigating potential risks associated with the identified components.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, under the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) Schedule of Airworthiness Directives, addresses the maintenance and safety requirements for McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters. This regulation applies to all 500D model 369D helicopters equipped with seat belt assemblies bearing parts numbers 369H6541-5 and -21. The directive, identified as Hughes SIN No. DN-26, mandates compliance with inspection and replacement timelines to ensure the airworthiness of these aircraft. Specifically, inspections must be conducted within 25 hours of time in service after 2 October 1978, while seat belt assemblies must be replaced within 100 hours of time in service following the same date. These provisions are designed to maintain safety standards for this particular helicopter model, and adherence is mandatory for all relevant operators and entities within the Commonwealth of Australia. The regulation does not explicitly mention any exclusions, exemptions, or thresholds, but it is understood that CASA may issue further subordinate instruments to clarify or expand on these requirements.
Key Provisions
The main sections of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, and the Airworthiness Directive AD/HU 369/32, pertain to the mandatory inspection and replacement of seat belt assemblies on McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters. The directive applies to all 500D model 369D helicopters equipped with specific seat belt assemblies identified by part numbers 369H6541-5 and -21 (Section 1). According to the document Hughes SIN No. DN-26, compliance requires that these inspections and replacements be conducted within a specified timeframe after 2 October 1978: an inspection within 25 hours of service time and replacement within 100 hours of service time (Section 1).
The obligations imposed by this legislation are quite clear and straightforward. Operators and owners of the specified helicopters must ensure that the seat belt assemblies are inspected within 25 hours of service time post the directive's issuance date. Following the inspection, if any deficiencies are identified, the seat belt assemblies must be replaced within 100 hours of service time (Section 1). These requirements are designed to maintain the safety and airworthiness of the aircraft by addressing potential issues with the seat belt assemblies in a timely manner.
Failure to comply with the requirements set forth in the Airworthiness Directive can lead to serious consequences. The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 outline that non-compliance with airworthiness directives can result in both civil and criminal penalties. Civil penalties may include fines, and in severe cases, criminal penalties may apply, which can include imprisonment. The specific maximum penalties are not detailed in the provided text, but they are likely to be significant given the safety-critical nature of the directive. Operators and owners must therefore ensure strict adherence to the mandated inspection and replacement schedule to avoid any legal repercussions.